Finally (finally), the long-awaited upgrade to Internet Explorer version 7 has been officially released by Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ: MSFT). IE7 -- as it's called -- has been available for quite some time in beta and release candidate status, but it is now official from the world's largest software maker. Although this sounds like a high and mighty event, I actually think it's a complete non-event.

The only reason Internet Explorer is even on the radar -- at over 84% marketshare at this time, astoundingly -- is because it ships with every copy of Microsoft Windows. Most of the world's public -- still to this day -- don't know that better, faster and more secure web browsers exist.

I personally have not used Microsoft's IE browser in over two years, but of course keep it around for websites that require IE usage. Mozilla's Firefox is superior in just about every possible way when it comes to the customization I need and the features that allow me to complete my work quickly and efficiently. Let me repeat that -- quickly and efficiently. A web browser is only as good as it makes life easy for its users, and by that measure, IE is (and has been) kaput.

Now, don't get me wrong, IE7 is a great upgrade with many new enhancements. But with the web browser turning into a main conduit to the outside world for many of us and it being almost the single-biggest piece of software used on most PCs, IE just doesn't add up. Opera is even miles ahead and has been. Will yo upgrade and use IE7 now that it's "officially released?" I say keep it handy, but there are far better choices.

[Disclosure: I own MSFT shares as of 10-19-06]

In a bid to push its new suite of integrated applications and tools, Microsoft is planning its initial deployment of Internet Explorer 7.0 via Microsoft's Automatic Updates Service.

So as to not cause another WGA (Windows Genuine Advantage) debacle, whereby downloaded 'Automatic Updates' were functioning beyond the expected scope of users ('dialing' back to Microsoft Servers automatically); IE 7.0 will be designated as a High Priority download, but users will be able to opt-out of downloading the product.

While the opt-out option is certainly a nod to user choice advocates, distribution of IE 7.0 at all via the Automatic Updates channel is in question. Automatic Updates should remain a primary channel for security updates only.

Distribution of a product should be initiated through a product distribution channel, either through standard retail or Microsoft's Download Center.

Of course from a business standpoint, this is a very logical move for Microsoft, taking a play from classic marketing textbooks. Have customers 'opt-out' rather than 'opt-in'. That way, by default you are capturing market share, and only by effort of the end user are you losing market share.

With alternative OS options emerging in lieu of the upcoming Windows Vista (ie. consumer and commercial flavored linux releases) and market penetration of the Macintosh platform, it is imperative that Microsoft hook users onto individual Microsoft applications which through integration with other MS products will synergistically push the Microsoft platform.

In the standalone browser market, IE 7.0 will launch before Firefox 2.0, though Opera 9.0 has launched and has gathered a relatively small but loyal following.

It's not the endlessly customizable interface that the open-source-hungry are begging for, but Microsoft's next beta release of its next-gen browser, Internet Explorer 7, will fix problems with some popular features when it comes out some time in August. Jeremy Reimer from arstechnica notes that the design of previous releases seems "bizarre" and confirms that users won't be able to change the layout -- with "the menu bar being sandwiched between the address bar and the tab bar" -- in Beta 3 according to a recent Microsoft chat.

In a bit of rather technical mumbo-jumbo about caching behavior (why you care: it greatly increases bandwidth requirements in the Beta 2 version), developer Eric Lawrence explains some of the fixes that will be available on the IEBlog.

Last week, the developers announced the official name of the new browser would be "IE7+" or "Internet Explorer 7+" rather than tying it to the Vista moniker (as Tony says, " 'The version of IE7 in Vista' doesn't roll off the tongue as easily...")

Google just can't seem to stop ruffling the feathers of people it seems. After a spectacular earnings report a week ago Thursday, GOOG today settled down big time to a semi-stratospheric $398.90 at market closing -- a drop of one-hefty figure: over 4.5% from Friday's close. One of the large items (and we mean, extra large, as in biggie, mucho grande, super size, whatever) of the Google news day was the apparent moaning it's made to Microsoft about the billion-dollar search bar featured in the next iteration of the world's largest web browser, Internet Explorer. Version 7 is due soon, and it will feature an integrated search bar -- just like its competitor Mozilla Firefox has done for years -- right into the browser. Guess which search engine it will be -- at least at present -- defaulting to? You win the stuffy bear prize if you can guess. And no, it's not Alta Vista. You have two more guesses.

Microsoft's next-next-next gen browser, Internet Explorer 7, has a search box in the upper right corner of the browser window. It goes to Google, right? Heh. I was just testing you. No, it goes straight to MSN's search engine - where, of course, Microsoft gets all the ad revenue.

According to a New York Times article, Google is complaining about this tactic to both the U.S. Justice Department and the European Commission, insisting that it smacks of Microsoft's infamous anti-competitive practices in the '90s. Currently, MSN has an 11% share of the search market, whereas Google rocks a 49% share. (Yahoo! is at 22%, in case you're keeping track.)

None of the previous IE browsers had included default search tools, although Firefox, Opera and Safari have included them (featuring: Google, but offering a drop-down menu) for a while now. Microsoft argues that, after all, a user can change the default search engine (and I'm sure I'm not the only one who realizes the typical consumer, won't).

I'm not a fan of anti-competitive practices but... who's the monopoly here? Did someone say something about 49% of the market? That's awfully close to a majority. If the consumers don't like it, there's always Firefox, where Google still reigns supreme.

[Image Haipunk]